Make American Great Again
- page 4

I am an avid supporter of our President, Donald J Trump and am willing to respond to anyone who posts here.
I would like to keep this thread free of name-calling (for anyone, including the... Read More

You are right, itsty bitsy. I am intolerant. I am intolerant of the thoughts and feelings of people who support and cheer on a person who: attacks a Gold Star family, calls for the jailing of political opponents, sexually assaults women and then openly brags about it, openly mock the disabled, call the media "the enemy of the people," openly mock world leaders, give political support and cover to pedophiles, give cover to White Nationalists and calls for violence at political rallies.

And you know what? ALL Americans should be intolerant of such things.

You can be intolerant of those things while still being tolerant of myself. But you're not. You've written off anyone who even remotely doesn't agree with you. Maybe I'm not intolerant of everything you have mentioned above because perhaps not everything is true. You refused to believe those things could be false and then you refuse to listen to anything beyond that because you have already written that person off.

Example: I am intolerant of murderers. John is a murderer. I am the judge and have ruled John guilty of murder because there is enough circumstantial evidence. John is sentenced to prison for 30 years. He pleads and appeals his case numerous times throughout his sentence to me. I deny it for there was too much "evidence" to overturn the sentence. For 25 years, John tried to appeal his case. On the 26th year, direct evidence was found. John had mentioned numerous times during his case about this direct evidence, but there was already too much circumstantial evidence incriminating John. The direct evidence found ruled John innocent. John was set free after serving 26 years, an innocent man. I didn't listen to John about the possibility of direct evidence because I was intolerant of murderers and the circumstantial evidence was too great. I ruined Johns life.

You can't write someone off because of something you believe to be true. It might not be true.

Dialogue doesn't simply happen because people refrain from name-calling and behave politely. I am sure neo-Nazis can behave very politely when they want to, and as a White woman, they would probably be very polite to me.

Without shared goals and values there is no dialogue.

If you refuse to believe that you can converse without having the same values and goals in mind, then there really is no point in you having any political discussion. All you want is the same thing said over and over.

I would think you would have discovered that by reading through even the limited responses to this thread.

Again, this is a board of nurses. Not the most diverse group. I noticed the obvious herd-thinking in the various threads. I brought something new. I thought the tolerant left would be open to listening and looking into their own "facts".

Do you think you are engaging in a dialogue? You are not. And when I write this, it isn't meant as a criticism of you. It is simply an observation based on the thread.

Everyone, thus far has been respectful. But there is no dialogue.

The only one stifling dialogue are the ones who choose to. It takes two to talk. I've responded to everyone and it seems as soon as I say something, there is another on-slaught about "what about this, this, and this". There is very little posts actually responding, rather they are dumping their talking points and running.

itsybitsy - With no apologies, it's beyond debate for me. Anyway, here is a post that I wrote earlier this year that might explain why I find the policies and political ideologies held by Trump and Trump's Administration to be dangerous to our country. I share to you insight to my thinking process and values. . .

I can see where you are going with this. However, how is this unique to the Trump administration as opposed to previous Presidencies?

Dec 23, '17

Ted and Nel-

I am with you. It's pointless to dialogue with someone who cannot deal with facts and instead can only spout back the misinformation and dogma from the alt-right news. Someone who has bought into the Trump brainwashing as espoused by his minions. I also can barely stand to engage with someone who supports a man who has done all the things Nel mentioned in one of her posts. We all heard the tape, in Trump's own voice, where he talks about assaulting women. We all saw how he made fun of the disabled reporter and disrespected the Khan family. Heard the comments he made about Megyn Kelly. Heard him say that the rioters in Charlottesville were "some very fine people". But yes-blame the MSM for everything. They are so unfair to Trump. Poor, poor Donald, so misunderstood and mistreated. Give me a break. He is a despicable human being and shames America nearly everytime he opens his mouth. Yet a declining number of people love him. There's got to be some pathology there.

I'm done with this thread. My time is better spent working on what will truly make this country better-flipping Congress in 2018 and finding a viable candidate to oppose Trump in 2020, should he last that long in office. I fervently hope he won't, although Pence is no prize either.

Then subtract what you would owe (from the calculator above) from your year to date withholdings (federal only) that is listed on your paycheck. That is how much you will save from the tax cut in 2018.

Yes, this will add to the deficit. About 1.5 trillion dollars throughout the next 10 years. President Trump has started to work down the deficit, but as I replied to a previous poster, the debt had been increased about 10 trillion dollars in just 8 years. I think we have some wiggle room, especially given that we will have less taxes. As for what you say will happen in 10 years, I don't know where you received that information... If you could provide a source?

Like the majority of the middle class, my increased share of the debt is more than the reduction in taxes, so even starting next year I'm essentially losing money. Even if we don't count increased federal debt against the cuts, the relatively small tax cuts for the middle class mostly expire by 2024, meaning either no cut or actually increase in taxes. Even when looking at the cuts as a percentage of incomes, the cuts give far more to the already wealthy, the middle class will initially get a tax cut of between 0.5 and 1.2%, falling to at or near 0% by 2027, while the top 0.1 to 1% get cuts that start at 8% now, and rise to about 10% by 2027.

Think of our federal finances like a shared credit card. Trump/Republican tax reform charges more than a trillion dollars to that shared credit card and gives most of it to the top 1%, and gives an initial token amount to everybody else initially, and then later actually increases everybody else's share of the debt that didn't primarily benefit them. It's essentially looting the US treasury.

Yes, the debt has already been increasing, but I don't agree that means we should drastically increase it, and about a third of the increase in debt over the last 10 years is thanks to the Bush tax cuts, so clearly it should be a concern.

Trump hasn't actually made in progress in reducing the deficit or debt, he's significantly increased the debt with tax reform, and his budget proposals increase spending, not decrease it. And the actual costs are likely to be more since he offsets some of his spending increases with cuts to medicare/Medicaid, which are effectively cuts to hospitals, and when this inevitably results in significant hospital closures then we're likely to spend that money anyway, so his actual spending is likely even more.

I'm not sure about the ins and outs of what President Obama's strategy was, as I'm sure the majority of the country was not either. The one thing I remember President Trump being critical about was the fact every time the U.S. would make a move, they would broadcast it. Why would you tell the enemy what you are going to do? I suppose you can say he rode the coattails of President Obama, but I don't know if that would be true.

We never actually announced specific strikes against ISIS. The forming of an 18 country coalition was known publicly, but that's part of the process of developing a coalition. But no, Obama never said "We're bombing X site tomorrow".

Trump on the other hand actually did tell the people we were bombing that we were bombing them. After a well publicized apparent use of chemical weapons by Syrian forces, Trump ordered the bombing of the airbase the attack was launched from, but notified Russia (the airbase was staffed with Russian military personal allied with Syria) hours before the attack, allowing the Syrians and Russian staff at the base to move everything of value first, the airbase was back up and running the next morning, launching additional attacks against the same village.

Well, the markets know as much as I do about whether job growth will go up or down. There really is no telling. However, on that same note, it is notable about the 4.1% unemployment rate, down 0.6% in a little less than a year. Can people really not get behind that? President Obama did decrease the unemployment as well from 10% to 4.7% in 7 years, so that is impressive as well. So the trend could be just that, a trend that doesn't matter who the person is behind the desk, but if it's not going the opposite direction, then is that a bad thing? We also have to be realistic about when is there a peak or trough?

According to Trump, the unemployment rate isn't useful in determining if the job market is improving or not. New jobs are a more useful measure, and based on job creation Trump hasn't improved on Obama's trend. I suppose we could give him credit for at least not imploding the job market (although tax reform might do just that), but I don't really consider lack of abject failure as a "success".

itsybitsy - Any member here can easily be looked up for posting history and to when he or she joined this bulletin board. So, I looked up your history. You are either a relatively new member or your UserID is a second account to this bulletin board. Either way, it seems that most if not all of your posts are associated with this one thread. Please know that many of us have been on this bulletin board for a long time. Most hold interests, and share posts that are not necessarily political in nature. Most, who align themselves to both political parties, are really good nurses and equally nice individuals. Please spend some time to get to know us beyond U.S. Politics. I share this to you only with deep respect, and an interest to get to know YOU better other than through political bantering.

Yes, I understand how a forum works. I mainly post in the regular allnurses part about nursing things. There was a post there talking about the hysteria surrounding the false news that Trump banned words. I was then invited to come to this side, the break room, to further discuss politics. So I did.

You're right about this post being all I post here, I never did venture to the break room except once or twice. I knew it was here, but last time, a few years ago, it seemed like just diaries and other oddities, not related to nursing. Not interesting to me.

I have posted many times in the allnurses side. This is my first time avidly posting in the break room.

I am sure everyone posting is a decent person. I never believed otherwise, but it is so, so, so, disheartening to see the lack of common sense and outright bias of EVERYTHING and people don't even bat an eye. It's frankly ridiculous. It's just herd mentality. Sheep. Blindly following and lifting each other up over things you don't even know to be true, just what the TV said it.

Someone who has bought into the Trump brainwashing as espoused by his minions. I also can barely stand to engage with someone who supports a man who has done all the things Nel mentioned in one of her posts. We all heard the tape, in Trump's own voice, where he talks about assaulting women. We all saw how he made fun of the disabled reporter and disrespected the Khan family. Heard the comments he made about Megyn Kelly. Heard him say that the rioters in Charlottesville were "some very fine people".

I'm not the one being brainwashed. This is the liberal mentality. You just can't STAND that someone has a different viewpoint. Yes, DJT said "grab them by the *****". Who the **** cares? People act like they are angels in society when everyone **** well knows stuff they have said they would not want the entire country listening to. And for what it's worth, he made a dirty joke, he never said he assaulted women. Let me guess, you support Bill Clinton?

The mocking of a disabled reporter is highly opinionated. There are multiple instances of DJT using this weird movement of his hands about many other people.

Forgive me, but the Khan family issue is a little bit forgotten. But wasn't the Khan father the one who started at DJT at the DNC?

But yes-blame the MSM for everything. They are so unfair to Trump. Poor, poor Donald, so misunderstood and mistreated. Give me a break. He is a despicable human being and shames America nearly everytime he opens his mouth. Yet a declining number of people love him. There's got to be some pathology there.

Well, I'm sorry you feel that way. Maybe with time, you'll see he is not out to kill us all, but actually in it for the people.

I'm done with this thread. My time is better spent working on what will truly make this country better-flipping Congress in 2018 and finding a viable candidate to oppose Trump in 2020, should he last that long in office. I fervently hope he won't, although Pence is no prize either.

Probably should aim for 2024, I think we will have DJT for 8 years. For a GOP nomination for 2024, I think Nikki Haley would make a superb 1st female President!

20. Repeal and replace Obamacare. Not a lie. DJT does want to. The rationale doesn't even say it's a lie but only that people would lose health insurance. I know part of it is no one will be force to get insurance or be billed from the IRS. DJT is removing that. Which most people would be happy. They aren't forced to pay for something. I don't know who is losing health insurance. Someone is paying for something.

Healthcare was one of Trump's most prominent campaign issues, he outlined his promises for the reforms he would support as: No cuts to medicare or Medicaid, no increase to the population that is uninsured, everyone will be insured, no increase in insurance premiums for anyone, and improved quality of care. The reform plans that he supported didn't just fall short of his lofty goals, they completely contradicted them, so either he blatantly lied or he lacks basic knowledge of healthcare policy.

The individual mandate was probably the most conservative part of Obamacare, the idea that if something is required to be provided for you then you should be responsible for paying for it is core republican ideology. What the individual mandate does is say that if you have the potential to end up in the hospital and rack up hundreds of thousands in costs then you should be required to ensure that those costs will get paid if you're able to. Without the individual mandate, freeloaders get a free pass to shift those costs to others, even though they may be more capable of paying into their own potential costs than others are to pay for the freeloaders.

Regarding ad hominem attacks, Ted is merely imitating Trump's own tactics. Trump is receiving exactly the same treatment he's meted out to his critics all his life. Not particularly constructive, I'll grant you. What can I say except that Karma's a (w)itch.

I can see where you are going with this. However, how is this unique to the Trump administration as opposed to previous Presidencies?

itsybitsy - I shared, in sincere hopes to satisfy your expectation(s) of thoughtful engagement, an important "Base Principle/Value" which goes a long way in formulating my political points of views. I apply this "Base Principle/Value" to any and all political figures regardless of political party affiliation. So, to my eyes, Trump and Trump's administration (along with the Conservative Republican Party) fail miserably. More importantly, to my eyes they're dangerous to our country. Still, I shared a core value that hopefully serves for you to understand my political points of view.

You. . . have yet to share your core principle(s) and value(s) to adequately explain to members of this board why you support the action and policies taken by Trump and his administration. I respectfully ask: What are your core values and principles that you use to justify supporting the actions and policies of Trump and his administration?

itsybitsy - I shared, in sincere hopes to satisfy your expectation(s) of thoughtful engagement, an important "Base Principle/Value" which goes a long way in formulating my political points of views. I apply this "Base Principle/Value" to any and all political figures regardless of political party affiliation. So, to my eyes, Trump and Trump's administration (along with the Conservative Republican Party) fail miserably. More importantly, to my eyes they're dangerous to our country. Still, I shared a core value that hopefully serves for you to understand my political points of view.

You. . . have yet to share your core principle(s) and value(s) to adequately explain to members of this board why you support the action and policies taken by Trump and his administration. I respectfully ask: What are your core values and principles that you use to justify supporting the actions and policies of Trump and his administration?

Here's what I think, Ted. Trump supporters are a lot like anti-vaxxers. There's a lot of hue and cry about what's wrong with liberals and democrats, but when asked to explain their reasoning, they can't. They have no substantive evidence that doesn't come from Breitbart or Fox news, or are actually ashamed to admit that they harbor some of the same misogynist beliefs that Trump so ignorantly demonstrates. Anti-vaxxers can't demonstrate any scientific proof that vaccines are harmful; they just spout nonsense from Mercola and Jenny McCarthy. It's the same kind of mentality.